But if you enjoy inferring tone, let me be more specific. I did not state that it's an uncommon problem, merely that chromebooks target a wide market audience. Therefore, certain portions of that audience require arbitrary non-technical features that serve no benefit to the overall technical quality of the product (eg. backlights, RGB, ect...). The reason that such features are arbitrary is not because they can't be useful to a specific user but because they inherently lack scalable usefulness across multiple segments. Where as everyone benefits from critical features such as a better processor, more robust battery, or greater screen-quality equally; only those with a deficient skill-set benefit from a back-light. (There's nothing wrong with this deficiency; but let's call a spade a spade, it's 2017 after all.) So much so, that with out a single tertiary feature they often shout the loudest that any such device missing the desired feature is a "non-starter" despite any other technical benefit or quality of the product--specifically I'm thinking of the recent Verge article that was aghast that a back-light could be missing. This leads to conflation of...
'that which is critical to myself (as a specific user), must therefore also be a critical feature of the product (for everyone).'
Typically this segment skews older in demographics, but it can align with other segments like myself with a partially dismembered left hand. Fortunately, I grew up with computers so typing without looking at my hands feels very naturally. Whereas a skillset that I'm deficient, like cursive does not; simply because it had no critical use in my formative years. In your example, you self-describe as a "power-user" which also fits you into the "non-savvy" category fairly well. The terms is generally provided to or self-applied by those whom have limited technical knowledge, but enough experience to complain loudly.
Thank you for the opportunity to discuss semantics through pedantry, it was a quite satisfying itch to scratch.